Discussing Other Teams' Moves Part 2

[badinage]

Memphis is a mess. It didn't have to be. That was a good team, physical, tough in the playoffs. You don't tear that down; you add pieces, tweak, do what Detroit did in trying to acquire the one player that puts you over the hump.

This idea that just because you can't win a title means you should rip it apart is laughable. That's how people on boards like this think. The Platonic ideal of a team or bust. We can't put up with 43-39 unless we're building a dynasty. No no. The team must possess extraordinarily efficient players who are also shot creators, dynamically skilled and capable of drawing double-teams, but unwilling to ever attempt more than 11 shots a game.
They must play hounding defense and possess "lock-down" defenders at PF and SF. They must be supremely unselfish. They must also be entertaining to watch.

Sometimes you have to endure imperfection to get to where you want. Cf, Danny Ainge's Celtics prior to Garnett's arrival.

There are many routes to success. Should 26 teams begin radical disassembly because they're not gonna win it all?

It's also laughable that they're taking direction from John Hollinger. I would be willing to mortgage my house that he never wins a division, let alone an NBA title. Jon Leuer! Efficient! A 9th man, but efficient! And he has Ed Davis now, so a tremendous player in Zach Randolph is next to be shipped out.

If I'm the Spurs or Thunder, I'm laughing, laughing, laughing.

[pancakes3]

Bravo badinage.

[LyricalRico]

This idea that just because you can't win a title means you should rip it apart is laughable. That's how people on boards like this think. The Platonic ideal of a team or bust. We can't put up with 43-39 unless we're building a dynasty. No no. The team must possess extraordinarily efficient players who are also shot creators, dynamically skilled and capable of drawing double-teams, but unwilling to ever attempt more than 11 shots a game.
They must play hounding defense and possess "lock-down" defenders at PF and SF. They must be supremely unselfish. They must also be entertaining to watch.

Sometimes you have to endure imperfection to get to where you want. Cf, Danny Ainge's Celtics prior to Garnett's arrival.

There are many routes to success. Should 26 teams begin radical disassembly because they're not gonna win it all?

[Nivek]

I know there are many who view Memphis as tearing apart their team. I don't see it that way. They swapped some bench guys for luxury tax relief -- which is something I think is entirely reasonable for a team to do. I think it's reasonable for a team owner to decide he doesn't want to pay the luxury tax. It's reasonable for an owner to make a profit.

The Gay trade ultimately comes down to your assessment of the players involved. If you think Gay is really a good player and that Davis and Prince are not, I can understand the "they're not committed to winning" sentiment. If you think Gay is pretty average...then you're going to have a different view.

In my view, Memphis won't have a drop-off once they get Davis and Prince integrated. I think they'll actually be better. Prince is similar to Gay in terms of size, defense and rebounding. Big difference between them is that Prince uses fewer possessions, but is more efficient. Acquiring Davis means they have no need to make another roster move involving one of their bigger salaries. He provides some quality frontcourt depth to go with Randolph and Gasol. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the Grizzlies going forward.

Gotta say, I actually do agree with badinage's central point that teams don't necessarily need to shoot for whatever "platonic ideal" of a team may be. I do think Memphis improved themselves on the court, this season.

I thought Wojo's "slam" of Hollinger was weak, though. Hollinger's been analyzing, watching, writing, and talking hoops in a very public way for ~15 years. Picking one bad call is...well...weak.* And I'm not just defending the stat guy here. I enjoy Hollinger's work, but I've never thought of him as a first-rate analyst. He popularized his PER stat, even though it has some significant flaws (too low a bar on efficiency, no differentiation between starters and bench players, no real accounting for defense).

* -- Not out of bounds, though. Even looking at Butler's numbers, I don't see much to recommend him. Still kind of an odd slam considering how little money Butler got $2.4 million per year -- hardly a break-the-bank deal.

[LyricalRico]

^ Just to clarify, I'm in support of badinage's thoughts in general. I wasn't really commenting on Memphis, and I'm very interested to see how this works out for them.

[Ruzious]

It is interesting that Memphis has one of the best records in the NBA - with Gay as their leading scorer and leader in minutes played. He must have been doing something right for their team chemistry. But on paper, it was a great trade for them. And I wouldn't sleep on Daye making a strong contribution for them. Call Prince and Daye the Rubberband Men.

[tontoz]

So Memphis is no longer a "good, tough, physical team" because they traded Gay?

I think it could easily be argued that Gasol, Randolph and Conley are all better than Gay, especially this season. A couple of years ago they beat the Spurs in the playoffs and took OKC to 7 games when Gay wasn't even playing.

[Dat2U]

Memphis is a mess. It didn't have to be. That was a good team, physical, tough in the playoffs. You don't tear that down; you add pieces, tweak, do what Detroit did in trying to acquire the one player that puts you over the hump.

Ridiculous. It depends on what you really think of Rudy Gay. To Memphis he wasn't worth the salary & he wasn't very efficient nor was he a lock down defender. Because of salary he'd become the default #1 option and put a ton of shots and played a ton of minutes to put up some marginally impressive per game numbers. Trading him, adding two key role players (Davis & Prince) and running the offense through Zach Randolph (who carried them through their non-Rudy Gay run previously) & Marc Gasol was a smart direction to go in IMO.

This idea that just because you can't win a title means you should rip it apart is laughable. That's how people on boards like this think. The Platonic ideal of a team or bust. We can't put up with 43-39 unless we're building a dynasty. No no. The team must possess extraordinarily efficient players who are also shot creators, dynamically skilled and capable of drawing double-teams, but unwilling to ever attempt more than 11 shots a game.
They must play hounding defense and possess "lock-down" defenders at PF and SF. They must be supremely unselfish. They must also be entertaining to watch.

I'm not sure Memphis is ripping it's team apart. To me their trying to create some flexibility by cashing in an expensive chip who they felt was a replaceable piece. Hollinger never liked Gay. Said so in many of his columns. He thought Gay was overrated & overpaid so Memphis dealing Gay after Hollinger takes over is no real surprise.

Regarding the Wizards. We can't win a title with this team. Why would we keep it together? To watch Nene & Okafor retire as Wizards? And who says this is a 43-39 team??? I think were actually 11-33, lol. To want efficiency when there's inefficiency.... to want skill, when there's little skill... to want entertainment, when there is so little to be entertained about... I see nothing wrong with that. I'm sorry that you do.

Sometimes you have to endure imperfection to get to where you want. Cf, Danny Ainge's Celtics prior to Garnett's arrival.

There are many routes to success. Should 26 teams begin radical disassembly because they're not gonna win it all?

Please, we are all Wizards fans here and your talking about "endure imperfection"? ARE YOU SERIOUS MAN!

Ernie Grunfeld is not Danny Ainge nor does he have a buddy like Kevin McHale that's ready to hook him up with a HOF'er.

Also continuity is for teams that believe they can contend. The Wizards have never contended so suggesting patience is silly.

It's also laughable that they're taking direction from John Hollinger. I would be willing to mortgage my house that he never wins a division, let alone an NBA title. Jon Leuer! Efficient! A 9th man, but efficient! And he has Ed Davis now, so a tremendous player in Zach Randolph is next to be shipped out.

If I'm the Spurs or Thunder, I'm laughing, laughing, laughing.

It's also laughable that the Wizards are still taking direction from Ernie Grunfeld.

If Hollinger never wins anything, he still has a chance for a more successful career than the Wizards long time GM.

[nate33]

So Memphis is no longer a "good, tough, physical team" because they traded Gay?

I think it could easily be argued that Gasol, Randolph and Conley are all better than Gay, especially this season. A couple of years ago they beat the Spurs in the playoffs and took OKC to 7 games when Gay wasn't even playing.

This.

[tontoz]

The Wizards haven't had a 50 win season since the 70s. This team is nowhere near a 50 win team even with perfect health.

It is laughable to even talk about title contention in regards to the Wizards. This team is a light year away from title contention.

[montestewart]

Bravo, Nivek, tontoz, Dat2U. Memphis is a pretty well-run team, not a mess. They were probably just feeding Gay the ball and minutes partially to shop him. They found a taker among, and the Wizards were probably a potential mark.

The "platonic ideal" cracks me up, a conglomeration of the extreme upper strata of all goals stated on this board into one irrational and impossible target. A fabricated position, one that puts up about as much fight as a fly with its wings removed. Well done!

Unfortunately, whatever is the opposite of the "platonic ideal," Leonsis seems to think that's the promised land.

[nate33]

I was just looking at New Orleans' cap situation. Man they've really done a nice job in a short period of time after the Chris Paul disaster.

Their payroll next year is just $42M with a lineup of:

PG Vasquez
SG Gordon/Rivers
SF
PF Davis/Anderson
C Lopez/Davis
Others: Jason Smith, Darius Miller, Lance Thomas

They're hurting at SF, but they really have a lot of nice players who are both young and pretty good. They will add a top 7 pick and possibly a major free agent this summer. What if they added Chris Paul and Shabazz?

[closg00]

the numbers suggest the NBA's next great center may be disguised as a role player for a lottery team. In fact, Drummond's first 46 games have put him in the conversation with Dwight Howard and Shaquile O' Neal

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/ ... -next-shaq

[Dat2U]

Drummond is the steal of the draft.

Should be a lesson to those that were so quick to dismiss a 18 yr old 7-0 with unreal physical potential in a bad situation last year (UConn).

Last year too many posters kept using Kwame, McGee or Blatche as reasons to ignore an unpolished uber talented big. Big mistake!

[nate33]

Drummond is the steal of the draft.

Should be a lesson to those that were so quick to dismiss a 18 yr old 7-0 with unreal physical potential in a bad situation last year (UConn).

Last year too many posters kept using Kwame, McGee or Blatche as reasons to ignore an unpolished uber talented big. Big mistake!

I was scared to death of his horrible free throw shooting and his lackluster production at UConn on the glass. He averaged just 10 points, 7.6 boards and 29% FT% for goodness sake! We've been burned too many times by guys with great measurements and no basketball ability. Drummond really looked like more of the same. I am truly shocked at how he has performed in the pros.

[Nivek]

Drummond's performance has been surprising to me, as well. I think most people recognized he had ability, but there was enough "stuff" (nate listed them quite well) to make people hesitate. When you dig into his numbers, in a sense both the "his potential is too significant to pass up" and the "watch out, there are too many red flags" are correct.

Drummond is doing in the pros all the stuff it looked like he'd be able to do based on his year in college. Specifically, he's rebounding well, he's blocking shots, and he's converting at the rim. He's also doing stuff poorly that it looked like he'd do poorly based on his year in college -- FT shooting and shooting from anywhere except at the rim.

In effect, he's a young version of Tyson Chandler. He's doing a lot of what he does well, and very little of what he doesn't do well -- more than 80% of his FGA have been from inside of 3 feet. Nearly 75% of his FGA have been dunks or layups.

He seems to be a demonstration of how effective a guy can be if he plays within his skill set. Rebound, defend, dunk.

[closg00]

Drummond's performance has been surprising to me, as well. I think most people recognized he had ability, but there was enough "stuff" (nate listed them quite well) to make people hesitate. When you dig into his numbers, in a sense both the "his potential is too significant to pass up" and the "watch out, there are too many red flags" are correct.

Drummond is doing in the pros all the stuff it looked like he'd be able to do based on his year in college. Specifically, he's rebounding well, he's blocking shots, and he's converting at the rim. He's also doing stuff poorly that it looked like he'd do poorly based on his year in college -- FT shooting and shooting from anywhere except at the rim.

In effect, he's a young version of Tyson Chandler. He's doing a lot of what he does well, and very little of what he doesn't do well -- more than 80% of his FGA have been from inside of 3 feet. Nearly 75% of his FGA have been dunks or layups.

He seems to be a demonstration of how effective a guy can be if he plays within his skill set. Rebound, defend, dunk.

This is also a cautionary tale of taking players who have no skill-set at all. *Cough Jan Vesely*

[Nivek]

Good point, closg. Vesely is almost entirely dependent on his teammates. This season, 80% of his at-rim FGs have been assisted. For Drummond, it's 59%. In a sense, Drummond "creates" shots for himself with offensive rebounding. He pulls down a teammate miss and puts it back in. Vesely needs a teammate to throw him the ball while he's at the rim for him to have a chance to score.

[pancakes3]

Perhaps this belongs in the trade thread but I think Detroit and the Lakers would both have a lot to gain in trading Monroe for Gasol.

[Ruzious]

Drummond's performance has been surprising to me, as well. I think most people recognized he had ability, but there was enough "stuff" (nate listed them quite well) to make people hesitate. When you dig into his numbers, in a sense both the "his potential is too significant to pass up" and the "watch out, there are too many red flags" are correct.

Drummond is doing in the pros all the stuff it looked like he'd be able to do based on his year in college. Specifically, he's rebounding well, he's blocking shots, and he's converting at the rim. He's also doing stuff poorly that it looked like he'd do poorly based on his year in college -- FT shooting and shooting from anywhere except at the rim.

In effect, he's a young version of Tyson Chandler. He's doing a lot of what he does well, and very little of what he doesn't do well -- more than 80% of his FGA have been from inside of 3 feet. Nearly 75% of his FGA have been dunks or layups.

He seems to be a demonstration of how effective a guy can be if he plays within his skill set. Rebound, defend, dunk.

That's how DeAndre Jordan earned a contract that most of us wouldn't even dream of - and I think he's got less talent than Drummond.